posted
Just shows your ignorance if you think slavery was the major reason for the civil war. Sates rights was the biggest reason. (oops, do I need to use “one of” or “the single” oh gosh, here we go again). Slavery was going away on both sides, yes, more quickly on the northern side. But they didn’t have the cotton fields that had come to depend on the labor. That doesn’t justify it in the least. But your comparison holds less water then a spaghetti sieve.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry Jay but I had to post a resonse your comments. This is taken word for word from the Declaration of Why Missippi Suceeded from the Union. This is the first few paragraphs. "Mississippi [Copied by Justin Sanders from "Journal of the State Convention", (Jackson, MS: E. Barksdale, State Printer, 1861), pp. 86-88] A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union. In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
posted
Right, but it was still more about States Rights then anything else. More info at home. Found this real quick. http://civilwar.bluegrass.net/ Not the best site. But has the general point of it.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel almost ill, in that I'm about to partially agree with Jay...
Yes, slavery was a major issue in the secession of states from the Union, however there were many proposals and compromises being profferred by both sides to alleviate the issue (the last being an impromptu session in mid February by delegates from all of the states in an attempt to pass an amendment saying that Congress could never interfere with slavery in the existing states).
What essentially pushed southern states over the edge was the increasingly "Federalist" attitude of the northern states that favored giving the National government all powers not explicitly designated as state powers. The addition of a tarrif on southern goods to protect northern farms from cheaper produce(slave labor was cheap labor) also helped to force the issue forward.
posted
Succession is following, being subsequent to. Secession is to secede, to withdraw from.
No judegementalism implied, folks just might want to know the correct spelling. Homophones are tough, especially when not used often. Posts: 720 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
Culture![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
Kama
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
